[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Thread safety of coroutine-sigaltstack

From: Paolo Bonzini
Subject: Re: Thread safety of coroutine-sigaltstack
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 16:14:21 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0

On 21/01/21 10:27, Max Reitz wrote:

Sure, I can do that.

I agree that there probably are better solutions than to wrap everything in a lock.  OTOH, it looks to me like this lock is the most simple solution.  If Daniel is right[1] and we should drop coroutine-sigaltstack altogether (at some point...), perhaps it is best to go for the most simple solution now.


Yes, between coroutine-ucontext and the upcoming coroutine-asm[1] (which I have shelved because it was mostly a requirement for x86 CET; but it will come back some day), sooner or later there will be no reason to keep coroutine-sigaltstack. Porting coroutine-asm to a new architecture is easy, I even managed to do it for s390. ;)


[1] https://patchew.org/QEMU/20190504120528.6389-1-pbonzini@redhat.com/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]